Big California style is here to stay: Oz Clarke

Mr. Broadbent's report, while factual, ignores the fact that the bulk of California wine that makes up the 90.2 million cases includes all California wine, not just the ultra premium and luxury class wines made in the most renown regions of the state. Large volumes of mass produced wines make up the bulk of the 90 million cases and true, most of these mass produced wines are under 14% alcohol. If you study just the ultra premium wines, those that get all the scores in W.S. you will find that most of them are over 14.5%. A million case growth in that department is substantial.

Big rich and alcoholic wines with high pH and low acid sounds like a good recipe for culturing a fine crop of Brettanomyces.

The best way to settle this is to make wines in different styles. Why not make wines to fit both markets, full bodied, fruity wines that put California on the map and more traditional wines, should I say, old fashioned, to fulfill the desires of the lovers of this style. You can have your cake and eat it too.
This is what we do at Deerfield Ranch Winery in Kenwood.

Sales of California wine "not over" 14% alc were 90.2 million cases in the first 5 months of 2011, compared to a mere 8.2 million cases over 14%, according to the latest Gomberg report.

Over 14% wine grew by less than a million cases in the same period compared to over 5 million case growth of wines not over 14%.

Oz Clarke's says "once you move away from the wine chatterati" there is a demand for high alcohol wine. Perhaps true but not as much as the demand for low alcohol wine.

To Mr. Lemon (whose wines are very fine indeed and loved my many, including me) I would say that Oz hasn't missed the boat at all. Having been 30+ years in the N. American fine wine business, I presently see no rush to abandon the big fruit/low acid wines. We keep in mind too that the Aussies contribute to this same "big wine" product pool. Yes, it's true that some consumers "graduate" to elegant, cuisine oriented wines - and some even start there. But my own observation is that for every two of these consumers I see at least three or four (generally neophyte consumers, not meant as a prejorative) of the other ilk who want "...a fruit bomb please..."

Mr Lemon, as usual, is correct

I haven't bought any California reds for several years and very few Chardonnays as they are skewed wines too. Either too fruity, too buttery, or too oaky. The California reds have no balance, no finesse, and little complexity at all. To those in California who do make balanced Red wines I'm sorry, but I am not going to bother as the majority have gone the high alcohol fruit bomb way.

No wonder Zinfindel is a great entry drug, erh, wine. But as I starred to drink more with food or without, I'm enjoying all different styles. As Stu789 says, "chacun a son gout" each to his own taste or for me, my taste preference changes depending a time and place and situation.

Ben is correct,our here in Healdsburg, CA we drink our Russian River Pinot Noirs, before dinner, so the fruit forward intensity works great, and not having any food means less acid is appropriate.

As astutue an observer of the world wine scene as Oz Clarke is, I think he is missing the boat on this one. In the last few years more and more Americans reach out to us, saying that they are tired of the "full throttle" style of American wines. If one is looking to feel the winds of change, I would not look to Napa. Too much is already invested by those players to dare to change until the public demands it. I invite Mr. Clarke to come out to West County Sonoma where the evolution is clear. While we are great believers in "vive la difference" at Littorai, we have always been dedicated to wines of elegance, suitable for fine cuisine. While we were quite the minority for years, more and more wine producers are coming on board everyday.

The French Paradox and the concept of wine as a healthy beverage did wonders for the consumption of red wine. Eventually someone will make a study that shows "monstrous" wines are less healthy, either because they are sweet or high alcohol or both. Then, dare I say, those who seek a balanced food friendly terroir driven product will have ammunition for their argument. Still they will be a minority of the drinkers and we need all types of wine but with some science to back them up perhaps that minority will grow.

Yes, as importers / marketers in N. America, we see trend this fairly clearly. Despite our sincere attempts to "tilt at windmills" and educate consumers, a large segment of the wine-buying public prefers big, in-your-face red wines (and big white wines too, when they drink white). This segment in turn appears, on the surface, to be driven by mid 20s to mid 30s male consumers who, for a number of reasons, will rarely bother with good claret, nevermind great Chianti Classico or fine Burgundy. At the restaurant level, it's vaguely amusing to see them ordering that Central Coast Syrah with the sea bass. I couldn't do it but that's fine - "chacun a son gout." All said, Clarke's final conclusion rings true regardless.

These fruit-bombs make sense when you remember that many people - particularly in the US - drink red wine as an aperitif and in bars. You don't want too much acidity or tannin if there's no meat around. And many Americans have just one glass so a heavy alcoholic style isn't the problem it would be if you were drinking a whole bottle.

New drinking habit, new style of drink.